93 Decision Citation: BVA 93-00463
Y93
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
DOCKET NO. 91-45 453 ) DATE
)
)
)
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for an acquired
psychiatric disorder.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL
The appellant, his spouse, and his father
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Stephen F. Sylvester, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
This matter came before the Board on appeal from a rating
decision of February 1990 from the Seattle, Washington,
Regional Office. The veteran had active military service
from April 1982 to April 1986. The notice of disagreement
was received in April 1990. A statement of the case was
issued in June 1990. An additional notice of disagreement
was received in June 1990. A supplemental statement of the
case was issued in October 1990. The veteran's substantive
appeal was received in October 1990. A hearing was held
before a hearing officer at the regional office in January
1991. An additional supplemental statement of the case was
issued in April 1991. The appeal was initially received and
docketed at the Board in October 1991. The case was
remanded to the regional office for further development in
May 1992. The case was once again received and docketed at
the Board in October 1992. The veteran has been represented
throughout the course of his appeal by the Disabled American
Veterans. That organization submitted additional written
argument to the Board in November 1992. The case is now
ready for appellate review.
At his personal hearing in January 1991, the veteran withdrew
the issue of entitlement to an increased rating for service-
connected hypertension. Accordingly, the Board will confine
its review solely to the issue stated on the title page of
this decision.
REMAND
When this case was previously Remanded we asked for a search
for additional service medical records, particularly the
enlistment and separation exaaminations. We asked that the
veteran be contacted to ascertain if he had any service
medical records in his possession and we asked that the
veteran be accorded a VA psychiatric examination. The search
for additional service medical records including contact
with the veteran produced no additional evidence and, the RO
apparently assumed that in view of this, the VA examination
was not is order.
It is our view that a VA psychiatric examination is still
required. During active military service, the veteran
received treatment for various nonspecific physical
complaints, including dizziness, "lightheadedness," and a
feeling of weakness. At no time during the veteran's active
service was there present a clearly defined and documented
psychiatric disability. We further note that, in May 1987,
slightly more than one year following the veteran's dis-
charge from service, he received treatment for what was
described as sharp, nonradiating chest pain. It was noted
at that time that the veteran was "anxious" and "trembling"
and that, based on his own history, he had recently been
discharged from the Armed Forces, where he had experienced
some "stress related medical problems." Shortly thereafter,
in July 1987, there was noted a diagnosis of severe anxiety
reaction with reactive depression, for which the veteran had
been placed on medication.
We wish to make it clear that, were a VA psychiatric examina-
tion to have been performed, and resulted in a diagnosis of
a neurosis, the Board's intention would be to grant service
connection for an acquired psychiatric disability. We
further note that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
has a duty to assist the veteran in the development of all
facts pertinent to his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West
1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1991). In light of the afore-
mentioned, in particular, the diagnosis of a clinically
definable psychiatric disability shortly following the
veteran's discharge from service, the case is once again
REMANDED to the regional office for the following action:
The veteran should be afforded a VA
psychiatric examination to determine the
presence or absence of an acquired
psychiatric disability. All pertinent
symptomatology and findings should be
reported in detail. The claims folder
should be furnished to the examining
psychiatrist prior to the examination in
order to facilitate the study of the
case.
Following completion of the above action, the regional
office should review the evidence, and determine whether the
veteran's claim may now be granted. If not, the veteran and
his representative should be provided with an appropriate
supplemental statement of the case, and the case should be
returned to the Board for further appellate consideration.
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
*
GEORGE R. SENYK
BRUCE E. HYMAN
*38 U.S.C.A. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (West 1991) permits a Board of
Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of
the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business
without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the
Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three
Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or
inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on
the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section
proceed with the transaction of business, including the
issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a
third Member.
CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United
States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the
nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a
decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 57 Fed.
Reg. 4126 (1992) (to be codified as 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b)).